| Risk factor | Finding | Evidence | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sellable | Yes | Transfer simulation | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Buy tax | 0% | Contract | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Sell tax | 0% | Contract | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Admin mint | Enabled | Contract | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Transfers pausable | Not present | Contract | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Address blacklist | Not present | Contract | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Upgradeable proxy | No | Contract | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Source verified | Yes | Block explorer | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Top-10 holders | 51.4% | Holder distribution | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Liquidity locked | No | LP holders | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Holders | 172162 | Token contract | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Deployed by | 0x06590a…9116da |
| Current owner | 0x48301f…73cf50 |
| Holders | 172,162 |
| Rank | Address | Share |
|---|---|---|
| #1 · contract | 0x36aff7…77f090 | 22.34% |
| #2 | 0x823fd1…27396c | 7.61% |
| #3 · contract | 0x32ec7a…7f2ca1 | 6.10% |
| #4 | 0xfcb40a…13d96d | 5.18% |
| #5 | 0x5b0a3c…05b4e1 | 2.19% |
This automated check of GRT on Ethereum scored 12 out of 18 on the date it was run, based on reading the contract's code and on-chain data rather than judging the project behind it. A few things are worth translating into plain terms. The contract allows the owner (or whichever address holds admin rights) to mint new tokens at will, which means the total supply is not fixed and could be increased, potentially diluting existing holders' share of the token. No pausable transfer function or address blacklist was detected, meaning that, as of this check, the contract does not appear to let an admin freeze trading or block specific wallets from moving their tokens. Buy and sell taxes were both found to be 0%, and a transfer simulation indicated the token is sellable, so no honeypot-style selling restriction was detected at the time of the check. The contract source code is verified on the block explorer, which allows anyone, including this automated tool, to read the actual logic rather than relying on compiled bytecode alone. On the less reassuring side, liquidity was found to not be locked, and the top 10 holders control 51.4% of the supply, both of which are concentration and exit-risk indicators worth weighing.
It's important to be clear about what this check does not cover. It only reads contract mechanics, things like mint functions, tax rates, pause switches, and holder distribution, as they exist on-chain today. It says nothing about the team behind the token, how tokenomics are intended to play out over time, whether there is a legal entity or regulatory registration attached, or what the project's actual intentions are. A contract can score well on mechanics and still be attached to a project with weak fundamentals, and conversely, flagged mechanics do not automatically mean malicious intent.
Before putting money in, it's worth looking into who controls the minting and admin privileges, for example whether they sit behind a multisig or a timelock rather than a single wallet, since that materially changes how much trust is required. Checking whether the unlocked liquidity is held by a known, long-standing pool or by an address that could withdraw it quickly is also worthwhile, as is researching the top holder wallets to see whether they are exchanges, team allocations, or unrelated large holders. Reading GRT's own documentation, audit reports if any exist, and community discussion will give context this mechanical check cannot provide.
Contracts change after they are checked. Tell us where to reach you and we will say when this one does. Free for three contracts, no account.
We checked 18 points out of 100.
The other 82 are where money is usually lost: who the team is, where the tokens sit, what the documents actually say, and what the project chose not to put on its front page.